This was a challenge; trying to glue up while bending reluctant wood into shape. I wanted to get this done because I am away for the next two weeks and the danger is that the bent wood would just spring back if it was not laminated.
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Mountain Dulcimer - Part Two
This was a challenge; trying to glue up while bending reluctant wood into shape. I wanted to get this done because I am away for the next two weeks and the danger is that the bent wood would just spring back if it was not laminated.
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
The Mountain Dulcimer Project
Brief Introduction:
I have enjoyed woodworking for many years and have managed to make every mistake possible. And slowly, but surely my skills and patience have improved. In my time I have built furniture, kitchen cabinets, a couple of wood/fibreglass canoes and outdoor garden things. So now I figure that I am ready to do some more intricate work and build a musical instrument. Risky, I know - but I'm just a kid with a crazy dream!
The mountain dulcimer is an American instrument that was not brought to the new world when the settlers arrived from Ireland and Scotland. It appears to be a recent (relatively) invention from the Appalachian mountain area of the United States (for a thorough history see Chet Hines' book How to Make and Play the Dulcimore). The sound of the instrument is sweet, plaintive and hauntingly beautiful (you can hear it played at: http://www.gilamountaindulcimers.com/pete.htm and on Joni Mitchell's album Blue).
First Steps:
I have been following some of the basic steps set out by Stephen Miklos on his webpage.
To date, have:
- Built the forms and the jigs
- Re-sawn the side pieces, the top and the back. (maple, butternut and curly maple)
- Booked matched and joined the top and the back
- Built the scroll
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
If It Be Your Will
If it be your will, that I speak no more
And my voice be still, as it was before
I will speak no more, I shall abide until
I am spoken for, if it be your will
If it be your will, that a voice be true
From this broken hill, I will sing to you
From this broken hill
All your praises they shall ring
If it be your will, to let me sing
From this broken hill
All your praises they shall ring
If it be your will, to let me sing
If it be your will, if there is a choice
Let the rivers fill, let the hills rejoice
Let your mercy spill
On all these burning hearts in Hell
If it be your will, to make us well
And draw us near and bind us tight
All your children here, in their rags of light
In our rags of light, all dressed to kill
And end this night, if it be your will
If it be your will
If it be your will.
Algonquin Park
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
The Red Cross Torture Report: What It Means (April 30, 2009)
The New York Review of Books
April 30, 2009
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/22614?email
The Red Cross Torture Report: What It Means
By Mark Danner
When it comes to torture, it is not what we did but what we are doing. It is not what happened but what is happening and what will happen. In our politics, torture is not about whether or not our polity can 'let the past be past'--whether or not we can 'get beyond it and look forward.' Torture, for Dick Cheney and for President Bush and a significant portion of the American people, is more than a repugnant series of 'procedures' applied to a few hundred prisoners in American custody during the last half-dozen or so years--procedures that are described with chilling and patient detail, particularity in this authoritative report by the International Committee of the Red Cross. Torture is more than the specific techniques--the forced nudity, sleep deprivation, long-term standing, and suffocation by water,' among others--that were applied to those fourteen 'high-value detainees' and likely many more at the 'black site' prisons secretly maintained by the CIA on three continents.
--------------------
If you enjoy this article, you may be interested in one of the
Review's free email newsletters:
http://www.nybooks.com/newsletters
You can also keep up to date with our RSS feed:
http://feeds.feedburner.com/nybooks
This message was sent to you using the "email to a friend" feature
on http://www.nybooks.com/. The New York Review of Books is not
responsible for the contents of this message.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Mindfulness and Military Training - Reprise
The context
The Iraq war was a unilateral act of aggression by the US and Britain, the so-called "coalition of the willing". The war was apparently a battle in the war on terrorism, this is the lie that had been perpetrated by the Bush administration from the beginning. In fact, Iraq posed no threat to the US and its allies. There were no weapons of mass destruction, this much we know from the UN investigators.
The real reasons for the US attack on Iraq, that began with the first Gulf war, and continued with the embargo that deprived innocent Iraqi children of food and medicine, likely had more to do with US economic and strategic interests in the area than anything else. The US military and its operatives, then, have been belligerents responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. (A 2003 medical survey published in Lancet put the death toll at the hands of coalition forces in Iraq at a conservative estimate of 100,000 non-combatants).
The Ethics
Given this context then, what are the ethics of using mindfulness to train young soldiers in preparation for duty in Iraq? The stated purpose of said training is to help prevent PTSD symptoms in these young men and women, which they are likely to suffer following their tour of duty. On the face of it this seems humane, in a sense treating the trauma before it occurs and saving these young people future suffering.
In the larger context, however, I see a problem. The problem is one of intention. What has been the intention of the military leadership in the Iraq theatre of war? As one of the belligerents the US military's intention has been to kill as many of the "enemy" as possible. And at this they have been very effective, at times killing non-combatants in the bargain. As Thich Nhat Hanh states so clearly this is the intention of any fighting force, and it is the focus of the military training in Iraq. The use of mindfulness in this way, means that it is being co-opted to increase the killing efficiency of soldiers in the battle field. If this was not the case, why would the US military agree to pay researchers, Amishi Jha and her colleagues, $740K (see: Jha's CV to confirm this amount) to conduct studies of mindfulness training?
An argument has been made that since the election of Obama, the role of the US military in Iraq is one of peacekeeping. There can be little doubt that there has been a re-evaluation of the US's involvement in Iraq since Obama took office. However, given the fact that the US and Britain have been belligerents in this war, to suggest that the US can now be peacekeepers is a total misunderstanding of the term peacekeeping. It's like having a bully physically abuse you, take your lunch money and smash your property to bits and tell you that they have now changed their ways and they are going keep others on the school yard from getting into fights. Only it's worse than that, because they have killed members of your family, taken your country's source of revenue and destroyed the infrastructure that you depend on for your livelihood. The victims of coalition aggression might have trouble believing that you now mean no harm.
True peackeeping is a function of the UN. It works when a neutral force is charged with the responsibility of keeping the belligerents apart long enough for a plan for peace to be constructed - it is what should have happened in Rawanda but failed due to a lack of interest by the superpowers (see Romeo Delaire's book "Shake Hands with the Devil"). If the US is serious about its intention of peacekeeping, ways to involve the world community need to be sought, revenue from oil needs to be given back to the Iraqi people and the US and Britain need to find the ways and means to pay for and re-build the infrastructure that doesn't impose massive debt on Iraq. This is a tall order, I agree, but it is the legacy of the last US administration's policy of world domination. (For an excellent discussion of the legacy of the Bush policies on world and America see http://www.nybooks.com/articles/22472)
The conclusion
Mindfulness training, as it is derived from the dharma, has no place in military training in Iraq because in the larger context the intention is still one of aggression on foreign soil. The ignorance of this context is what struck me as "hollow" in Amishi Jha's answer to the queston posed to her.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
What the Dharma Says About Training in the Military
Thich Nhat Hanh speaks on Prisoner Abuse
![]() |
A: Recent news about the abuse of prisoners of war provides us with the opportunity to look deeply into the nature of war. It reveals the truth that has been hidden to many of us about what actually goes on during war and conflict. This is an opportunity for us to be more aware. This is not new; everywhere there is war, these kind of things happen.
Soldiers are trained to kill as many people as possible and as quickly as possible. Soldiers are told that if they don't kill, they will be killed by the so-called "enemy." They are taught that killing is good because the people they are trying to kill are dangerous to society, and that they are demons, that our nation would be better off without them. Soldiers are trained to believe they must kill the other group because they are not human beings. If soldiers see their "enemies" as fellow human beings just like them, they would have no courage to kill them. Every one of us should know the way soldiers are trained in order to see the truth about war. It is important not to blame and single out the U.S. in this kind of situation because any country would do the same thing under the same conditions. During the Vietnam war atrocities were committed by both sides also.
The statement President Bush made that the U.S. just sent dedicated, devoted young men, not abusers to Iraq shocked me, because committing acts of torture is just the result of the training that the soldiers have already undergone. The training already makes them lose all their humanity. The young men going to Iraq were already full of fear, wanting to protect themselves at all cost, so they are pushed to act quickly, being ready to kill at any moment.
Q: Why would the soldiers torture the Iraqi prisoners?
A: When you are engaged in the act of killing, aware that fellow soldiers on your side are dying every day and that it is possible for you to be killed at any moment, you are filled with fear, anger and despair. In this state you can become extremely cruel. You may pour all of your hate and anger on prisoners of war by torturing and abusing them. The purpose of your violence is not only to extract information from them, but also to express your hate and fear. The prisoners of war are the victims, but the abusers, the torturers are also the victims. Their actions will continue to disturb them long after the abuse has ended.
Even if the superiors of the individual soldiers have not directly given orders to mistreat, abuse, or torture, they are still responsible for what happened. Preparing for war and fighting a war means allowing our human nature to die and the animal nature in us to take over. We should never be tempted to resort to violence and war to solve conflict. Violence always leads to more violence.
It is possible to achieve peace through peaceful means and there are many examples of this in history.
Thich Nhat Hanh
May 18, 2004
Plum Village, France
